NAME: ANAGHA

ROLL NUMBER: 0720055

COURSE: BA HONS POLITICAL SCIENCE (4th Semester)
TOPIC: GLOBAL POLITICS

Culture and Globalization

Transnational flows of people, financial resources, goods, information and culture have recently
been increasing in a drastic way and have profoundly transformed the world. This phenomenon
has been labeled globalization. The term globalization is used in many ways, for example to
describe a set of phenomenon- the transfer of money around the world, development of
information technology, and communications, international production, decline of nation states,
and the increase tourism. It is also used as a discourse in which the acceptance of globalization is
seen as irresistible, irreversible and inevitable. As such, globalization becomes a sort of natural
process outside the control of human agency. Anthony Giddens has described globalization as
the “intensification of social relations which link distant localities in which local happenings are
shaped by events far away and vice versa.” David Held and Anthony McGrew have defined
globalization as growing world interconnectedness, it denotes the expanding scale, growing
magnitude, speeding up and deepening impact of inter-regional flows and patterns of social
interaction. Globalization is also defined as the compression of the world and the intensification
of consciousness of the world as a whole.

Globalization is a multidimensional phenomenon that encompasses not only economic

components but also cultural, ideological, political and similar other faces. Consequently,
globalization has been addressed from the points of view of economics, social sciences, politics
and international relations and has been subject to endless debates in various disciplines.
Nonetheless, globalization effects are rarely addressed as a determinant that impacts societies
and their cultures. More precisely, the interaction between globalization and culture still remains
under-researched and the current globalization debate in this respect is relatively recent. n an
increasingly borderless world impacted by a globalization of economies, the preservation of
cultural diversity feeds contrary and controversial reactions. For instance, contends that while
changes and potential losses imposed by globalization on local and traditional cultures, including
those extending to cultural differences, may be damaging and destructive, they may also lead
towards new prospective opportunities.
Cultural Globalization
Scholars and researchers do not agree on a general definition of culture with over 150 plausible
definitions identified in the 1950s. In fact, culture has been studied from various fields such as
anthropology, sociology and psychology. Hofstede defines culture as “the collective
programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or society or category
or nation from another”. The ‘mind’ refers to thinking, feeling and acting, with consequences for
beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. In this regard, values and systems of values constitute a core
element of culture. While the concept of ‘culture’ can be applied to any human collectivity, it is
often used in the case of societies which refer to nations, ethnic entities or regional groups within
or across nations. As such, culture is concerned with a distinct environment of a community
about which members share meaning and values. Thus, culture is not rigid. It is a process that
gradually builds up through interaction. Culture allows individuals to create human societies by
defining the conditions of how people live among each other and together, as well as, by abiding
to social and cultural codes that distinguish them from other cultures. In a nutshell, the concept
of culture has two major definitions. On the one hand, culture is an integrated set of values,
norms and behaviors acquired by human beings as members of a society. As such, culture
constitutes an element of identification within a given group of individuals and an element of
differentiation vis-à-vis other groups from an anthropological standpoint. On the other hand,
from a sociological stance, culture refers to artistic and symbolic creations, heritage and cultural
products. In relation to globalization, these two aspects have important implications with respect
to how individuals express their cultural identities, in terms of the future of cultural traditions,
and with cultural industries.

For millions of years, human groups spanned over immense territories without means of
communications other than reliance on their physical body parts such as their eyes, voices, hands
and legs. With the advent of the urbanized metropolitan cities dating back to more than 5,000
years ago and the beginning of commercial activities, cultural exchanges have taken place
between individuals living among various societies. However, in the past, means of
communication and transportation were limited and cultural characteristics did not circulate as
rapidly and easily as in modern times.

With the industrial revolutions, societies began to have access to machines which allowed them
to create cultural products and export them across borders. By the 18th century, thinkers had
forecasted a non-reversible trend of cultural standardization. However, the predominance of the
nation-state and national economic barriers had protected and insulated cultures from external
influence. Cultural uniformization based on the European model at the end of 18th century was
prevalent, particularly due to the success of the rational capitalism that characterized Europe and
which was the symbol of cultural modernity. Additionally, the enlightenment thinkers had
forecasted a uniformized and borderless world in the sphere of values. In the 19th century,
cultural industries depended on technical innovations during the first and second industrial
revolutions such as, printing in 1860, and electricity and cinema in 1890. Further, cultural
miscegenation-related fear dates back to 1853 when Arthur de Gobineau wrote an influential
essay on the inequality of human races in France. Marx and Engels noted an intellectual
convergence in the literature which was a kind of intellectual globalization of ideas that preceded
the materialistic globalization of goods and markets. As for the German intellectual Goethe, he
pleaded for a world culture through world literature where everybody would contribute. In the
20th century, cultural industries appeared as communication technology started to develop and
flow effortlessly across borders. Interactions between globalization and culture do not seem to be
a recent phenomenon. In fact, they constitute, particularly with the influence of globalization on
culture, a contention point in the literature as various theoretical standpoints have been
developed to examine these interactions. These standpoints will be grouped under three different
scenarios and presented in the subsequent sections.

Cultural globalization is the process whereby information, commodities and images that have
been produced in one part of the world enter into a global flow that tends to ‘flatten out’ cultural
differences between nations, regions and individuals. Cultural globalization is closely linked to
and emerged in association with economic globalization and the communication and information
revolution. However, cultural globalization is a complex process that generates both
homogenization, or cultural ‘flattening’, and polarization and diversity. The latter may occur
both because cultural products spread more easily if they adapt to local traditions and
understandings, and because the perceived domination by foreign ideas, values and lifestyles can
create a cultural backlash, fuelling the rise of ethnic, religious or national movements.

Heterogenization
Two distinct editions of heterogenization may be distinguished. The heterogenization at a local
degree refers to a state of affairs wherein the practices of a sphere of lifestyles in a selected
milieu or locale become more diverse over a length of time. The heterogenization at a trans-local
or worldwide level refers to a state of affairs wherein the practices of a sphere of lifestyles in as a
minimum locales become greater distinct over a length of time. In short, heterogenization, which
has additionally been classified differentiation, relates essentially to boundaries that save you
flows that could make a contribution to creating cultures' appearance alike. In this perspective,
cultures continue to be exclusive from one another.

Heterogenization represents a procedure which ends up in an extra inwardly appearing

international because of the intensification of flows throughout cultures. Hence, local cultures
enjoy non-stop transformation and reinvention because of the influence of world elements and
forces. It is crucial to maintain sight of the reality that according to this perspective, cultures do
now no longer continue to be unaffected by way of means of international flows and
globalization in general, however the real crux of the lifestyle stays intact and unaffected, as has
usually been with simplest peripheral surfaces without delay impacted.
Different cultural groups develop into heterogeneous entities due to differences in demands
necessitated by their environment in efforts to adapt to the requirements of the latter. And
consequently over a period of time, these groups become diversified and very different due to
environmental circumstances and pressures. For instance, although the spread of the colonization
phenomena yielded a reduction of cultural differentiation, when the colonization movement
receded, cultures sprung up and cultural differentiation was favored. In sum, it's been
documented in a few times that overseas cultural practices stay with inside the margins of local
and countrywide cultures ensuing in a side-by-side coexistence of wonderful and disparate
worldwide and local cultures. It appears that cultural differentiation will at maximum possibly
stay sturdy in spite of globalization forces. What will likely alternate are the standards utilized by
distinctive cultural corporations to outline their identification and differentiation vis-à-vis
different cultures.

Homogenization
Across different areas and international locations within the global, increasingly more human
beings appear to look at the same entertainment programs, pay attention to the identical music,
devour common international brand merchandise and services, and put on the identical or
comparable clothes. These similar traits in cultural practices are suggestive of the emergence of a
“global culture” or “world culture” primarily based totally on the belief of the demise of the
countryside as a primary participant on the worldwide stage. In different terms, globalization
contributes in growing a brand new and identifiable magnificence of folks who belong to an
emergent international culture. Also the world is presently experiencing Americanization, rather
than globalization with the former referring to the global spread of America’s influential
dominance and culture through drastic growth of mass communication and penetration of
American companies in other countries. As a matter of fact, there seems to be an American
hegemony reflected by a domination of the Internet as 85% of web pages originate from the
United States and American companies control 75% of the world’s packaged software market. In
addition to the latter, there is an American monopoly of the media as seen with popular films,
music, and satellite and television stations around the globe. It should be highlighted that the
American conception of culture is open and far from the erudite notion of several European
countries, for instance. Further, the American way of life does not appear to be elitist and aims at
spreading cultural products to the masses which increase economic opportunities. This model is
desired by other populations, developed and developing.

McDonaldization is the idea of a worldwide homogenization of cultures through the effects of

multinational corporations. The process involves a formal consistency and logic transferred
through corporate rules and regulations. The McDonaldization model refers to the principles that
the McDonald’s franchise system has been able to successfully spread across borders and into
the global marketplace. These principles embedded within the system are efficiency,
calculability, predictability, and control. In fact, the McDonald formula is a success for the
reason that it is efficient, quick and inexpensive, predictable and effective in controlling both
labor and its customers.

Despite the contribution of the McDonald's stion theory in explaining implications of

globalization, Pieters stresses that fast food outlets like McDonalds and the sort are not at all
culturally homogenized but rather characterized by differences that reflect culturally mixed
social forms. In fact, McDonaldized systems have had to adapt in order to succeed overseas. Ki
iiOrganizations once imported, serve different social, economic and cultural functions that all
need to be custom-tailored to local conditions.

Lastly, Appadurai and Pieterse argue that cultural homogenization is too simplistic as several
local cultures have demonstrated their ability to domesticate or resist foreign cultural influences.
Therefore, interactions between cultures favor cultural hybridity rather than a monolithic cultural
homogenization. In doing so, globalization leads to the creative amalgamations of global and
local cultural traits.

Hybridization
The procedure of translocal fusion and cultural blending or hybridization is some other version
that touches on interactions among globalization and culture. According to the hybridization
view, outside and inner flows interact to create a completely unique cultural hybrid that
encompasses components of the two. Barriers to outside flows exist; however, even though
they're effective enough to defend local cultures from being overwhelmed with the aid of using
outside exchanges, they're now no longer effective enough to absolutely block outside flows.

Between two extremes of homogenisation and localisation, there exists third complex possibility
of hybridisation in which global and local forces mutually reinforce each other than necessarily
being in conflict. It is argued that consumers often “draw from all available global and local, new
and old sources as they use products to position themselves in the local age, gender, social class,
religion and ethnic hierarchies”. Robertson’s concept of ‘glocalisation’ is one such case where
homogenisation and localisation plays in tune with each other. Ritzer defines globalization as
“the interpretation of the global and the local, resulting in unique outcomes in different
geographical areas.” Global becomes localised and local goes globalised. What was initially the
global ultimately becomes the local, with massive transformation to fit the local culture.

Indigenization takes place to such an extent, that they ultimately reflect local society and culture.
Consumers cease to view them as ‘exotic’ and make them a part of the local scenes cape. It
enables consumers to receive the benefits of foreign goods with continuous maintenance of
traditional values. This interaction between global and local has been significant source of
uniqueness and innovations.

In one of the most influential accounts of trends in global consumerism, Benjamin Barber (2003)
portrayed the emerging world as a ‘McWorld’. McWorld is tied together by technology, ecology,
communications and commerce, creating a ‘shimmering scenario of integration and uniformity’
in which people everywhere are mesmerized by ‘fast music, fast computers, fast food – with
MTV, McIntosh and McDonald’s pressing nations into one commercially homogeneous theme
park’. Alongside and reflecting such developments has been the increasing standardization of
business organizations and practices, commonly referred to as ‘McDonaldization’. Underpinning
the emergence of McWorld has been the seemingly relentless spread of materialist values, based
on the notion of an intrinsic link between wealth and happiness. For many, these trends have a
markedly western, and more specifically American character. The ‘westernization’ model of
cultural globalization derives from the fact that the West (see p. 26) is the home of consumer
capitalism and industrial society, and is backed up by the belief that the ethic of material self-
seeking is a specifically western value, stemming as it does from western liberalism. The
‘Americanization’ model of cultural globalization reflects the disproportionate extent to which
the goods and images that dominate modern commerce and the media derive from the USA,
meaning that the world is being taken over not just by consumer capitalism but by a very
particular US model of consumer capitalism.

The process of hybridization is distinguished from the McDonaldization theory in part due to the
fact that it is not derived from pre-established theorems but has ventured into a divergent
unexplored and unmarked path. While homogenization in general and McDonaldization in
particular evoke a victorious Americanism, hybridization is indefinite and open-ended in
reference to practical experience and from a theoretical perspective. The theory does not
correspond to an established theoretical matrix or paradigm but it conjectures a shift by virtue of
its nature. The hybridization thesis stands for cultural convergence and assimilation. The theory
advances cultural mixing and integration without the need to give up one’s identity with
cohabitation expected in the new cross-cultural prototype of difference. The McDonaldization
thesis may be interpreted as a policy of closure and apartheid as outsiders are encouraged to
engage in the global arena but are kept at a peripheral distance by the most dominant force in the
game.

As a final thought, it appears that only the superficial elements of a culture are what are actually
being mixed together. Conversely, the deeply rooted and inherent aspects of a culture are not
subject to the blending and fusion. In fact, only the peripheral elements of culture actually
navigate and traverse beyond borders and across national cultures via external and marginal
rudiments such as cuisine, fashion styles, shopping habits, crafts, arts and entertainment.
Meanwhile deeply rooted underlying assumptions, values and beliefs remain adjacent to their
original cultural context.
Conclusion
Interactions between globalization and culture, particularly the influence of the former on the
latter, constitute a contention point in the literature as various theoretical scenarios have been
developed to examine these interactions. The heterogenization view, which is also classified
differentiation, relates basically to boundaries that prevent flows that might make a contribution
to the sameness of culture.

In the homogenization perspective, which is also called convergence, barriers that prevent flows
that might make a contribution to creating cultures appearance alike are weaker and the global
flows are stronger. In its severe form, there may be a possibility that nearby cultures may be
formed and beaten by way of means of different more powerful cultures or maybe a global
culture.

According to the hybridization view, external flows interact with inner flows to create a
completely unique cultural hybrid that encompasses additives of the two. There is no doubt that
cultures get influenced and shift through contact with other cultures. However, this influence and
shift does not mean cultural standardization or convergence towards a world cultural model
based on the American or the European one.

Some authors have rejected the simplistic idea of homogenization and convergence as there is
empirical evidence that supports the fact that globalization preserves national particularities. In
fact, nations will maintain their variety and complexity, and cultural diversity is not endangered
as cultural differences between countries are maintained. Nations get involved in cultural
integration processes on a regular basis without losing their cultural peculiarities. They interpret
cultural elements in light of theirs in a way that they become compatible with their culture. The
adoption of a Western way of life does not mean standardization. Human societies resort to their
symbolic fences in order to express their particularity and difference as a set of customs, habits,
practices and productions.

It is our contention that homogenization and hybridization are concerned with cultural artifacts
rather than with cultural values and underlying philosophical assumptions of a given culture. It is
noteworthy to mention that the former do not impact the latter. It seems that the superficial
elements of cultures such as clothing, fashion, foods, arts, music, movies and crafts are what gets
transferred whereas the deeply embedded components of cultures remain contextually bound and
culturally specific. Every culture maintains its cultural particularities while absorbing and
interpreting cultural characteristics of other societies with which they are in contact. In fact,
cultural exchanges among nations are positive as seen with the influences that global trade
transactions have exerted on cultural identities. These transactions are not purely and solely
destructive and negative for local cultures, they also bring about more possibilities and
opportunities. In this regard, cultures are dynamic rather than static and can incorporate foreign
contributions into their components without being necessarily subject to cultural domination.
Interactions among globalization and tradition preserve big implications for each society and
corporations. In this respect, economic globalization can also additionally exert a power in
reinforcing the ideology of individualism worldwide. As globalization promotes the flow of
cultural practices and norms along with cross-border exchanges of merchandise and goods,
societies and corporations want to recognize cultural implications of those flows in hopes for
higher interplay with different cultures and greater green control of worldwide corporations. In
addition, at the same time as resorting to standardized practices throughout cultures, corporations
want to evolve those practices in terms of neighborhood cultural specificities.